Skip to main content

This site requires you to update your browser. Your browsing experience maybe affected by not having the most up to date version.

All other Modules /

Discuss all other Modules here.

Moderators: martimiz, Sean, Ed, biapar, Willr, Ingo, swaiba

Simplify - new version allows customisation of the Tiny MCE HTML Editor

Go to End

30 Posts   7443 Views


Community Member, 68 Posts

13 November 2009 at 10:37am

Hi froog.
first of all, congratulations, simplify seems to simplify my life with deployment of SS_powered pages to my client.
WIthout much changes I was able to create a standard user, which has limited access to what he can do when logged in - i only wanted him to be able to add/edit/delete blog entries within two blog holders.

I have noticed one bug (I think).
When i log in as admin, the whole sitetree on the left is expanded and i dont see the "-" icons to close them. clicking seems to work and i can collapse them.

I would prefer to load up the sitetree totally collapsed. I think this is the standard way it opens.

Any idea how to change this ?



Community Member, 288 Posts

14 November 2009 at 4:16am

Really great work!

However I have some problems/questions. Sometimes when saving Simplify it gives me a javascript parse error. I don't have access to any developer tools right now so I can't trace it for you but I'll fix that when I get home.

Also I'm wondering what the Fields tab is for. I loaded the tree and checked pretty much everything for my test user. After reloading the CMS I didn't see any difference, the user could still access/change everything. Changing the other settings like hiding the Create button and limiting what pages the user can create works fine.

The feature I'm really looking for (which I'm unsure about if it's doable) is the ability to hide parts of the sitetree for the user so if they can only edit a certain part of the site then that's the only thing they can see. Maybe this is what the Fields tab is for but I can't get it to work.

About the philosophy question over what should be acccessible to the users and what shouldn't I think SilverStripe takes it too far in the simplicity direction. Pretty much all my customers want access to more stuff like this, not less. We shouldn't underestimate our users they can handle alot as long as the interface for it doesn't suck.

A case in point here is Wordpress which is less powerful than SilverStripe but gives alot more control to the user through the UI. So far none of my customers have had any problems with complexity in Wordpress and I often get the request to expose more features in Wordpress too.

The question shouldn't be is this too hard/complex, it should be will this be useful to alot of the users (or a specific client if you're just building a specific client implementation). If the answer to that question is yes then it's all about making a good UI. If you have a good UI complex tasks often won't feel as complex and vice versa. Case in point here is Drupal which often makes what should be simple things really hard. Our job is to make hard/complex things easy for the end user, not to get rid of the hard/complex things completely.

At least that's my opinion.


Community Member, 43 Posts

15 November 2009 at 3:43pm

qlex - I can't duplicate that bug - what conditions are you using it in? (ie; SS version, Simplify version, browser, Simplify permissions selected)
I know the tree had issues in earlier versions of Simplify, but you shouldn't see it in 0.0.6 onwards.

Smurkas - the same as above... the javascript in Simplify is, to be honest, not as good as it could be - But I'm not going to improve it as SS 2.4 has improved, redone CMS JS - so I'm waiting til thats released before I dive in and make it better.

Yes, the Fields tree is designed to hide certain fields and tabs from users. It currently works by doing an AJAX call to the server everytime you click on a checkbox - so use Firebug and look both in the Console and the Net tab - there should be a GET to the server when you click - (admin/simplify/toggleFieldsPermission) - check the response, it should be empty, but it may have an error.

The quickest way for me to debug would be to look at your CMS directly - so if you have a dev or test version (or just copy it) I'm happy to log in and take a look.

Also as to the simplicity philosophy - I agree - I think Silverstripe does have the right idea by building a solid, simple base to work on, and seperating design, development and admin.

If users want more 'stuff' they can get it in modules, like Simplify.



Community Member, 43 Posts

15 November 2009 at 3:47pm

Edited: 15/11/2009 3:48pm

Smurkas - just another quick note - if you just want to hide certain pages in the sitetree from a group, make sure they can't edit it (in the pages' Access tab), and check "Hide pages this group cannot view or edit" under the Tree tab in Simplify.

This can quite quickly tidy up the tree.


Community Member, 68 Posts

18 November 2009 at 5:46am

Edited: 18/11/2009 5:52am

froog: i am using 0.0.2, i will try to upgrade to 0.0.6 and see what happens.

EDIT: works!



Community Member, 30 Posts

23 November 2009 at 8:39am

Hi Dan,

Your latest version of Simplify really is very good. Congratulations on making a such a useful plugin, and thanks.

One thing I have particularly noticed is that you can't hide the "content" field. It fully breaks silverstripe when you try to access a page where this has been hidden (in the CMS as a simplified user). If you go back to admin to uncheck it, the whole main tab has become hidden, not just the content form within it.

Any ideas?



Community Member, 43 Posts

28 November 2009 at 12:08pm

Edited: 28/11/2009 12:13pm

Kevino -yes, I'm now aware this is a bug -I'd say it occurs because the Content field is tightly coupled to Silverstripe, and it doesn't like it being removed.

I'll take a look - in my opinion you should be able to remove the field without breaking the CMS, so it's likely to be an actual bug on Silverstripes part rather than Simplify's

Simplify uses the standard FieldSet removeByName method to remove fields.


Community Member, 43 Posts

28 November 2009 at 12:19pm

I take that back about it being an SS bug - at first glance, because I'm using removeByName its removing the Content tab instead of the Content field.

I'll fix it...